That is the list for only Canada, if you look at other countries, and at forwards too, there are plenty of players at 18 years old .... the list goes on and on.

The probability of the players making Canada team and will become a good player in NHL: 50%
The probability of the players NOT making Canada team and will become a good player in NHL: 30%
The probability of the players NOT making USA team and will become a good player in NHL: 20%

That is the list for only Canada, if you look at other countries, and at forwards too, there are plenty of players at 18 years old .... the list goes on and on.

The probability of the players making Canada team and will become a good player in NHL: 50%
The probability of the players NOT making Canada team and will become a good player in NHL: 30%
The probability of the players NOT making USA team and will become a good player in NHL: 20%

The probability of the players making Canada team and will become a good player in NHL: 50%
The probability of the players NOT making Canada team and will become a good player in NHL: 30%
The probability of the players NOT making USA team and will become a good player in NHL: 20%

You honestly cannot be serious. Where are those stats you're referring to? And even if I take the "Not making USA"...are you referring to from 20 10 years ago, 5 years ago? You do realize that the US is a much much stronger crop than they ever was in the past so that it might apply at one point but nowadays? You do know that a lot of experts are already giving the championship to the US this year?

Its his first CHL season. Can you all relax.
WJC isnt always a measuring stick as we have seen great players not on the team, and guys on the team who have been busts.

Let him develop. Defencemen always take time to find their game. Give him time before you give him the "Fischer" label.

Again, although the thread title is based on the WJC team, the evolution of discussion has pointed out that it was almost a foregone conclusion from last summer that he wouldn't be on the team, so nobody is especially worried about that.

The thing which is legitimately worrisome is that he's not excelling in any way in the OHL. Taylor Doherty is an example of a *2nd round* pick with some ostensibly similar traits from a recent draft. Now, he hasn't made a WJC team either, and won't. Yet, as a drafted 18-year old, he was at least putting up a 40-pt season and 100 PIMs and was a key player on his (mediocre) OHL team. At least he stood out. That is cherry-picking just one example. But I think it is a representative one. Usually, players who are drafted in the NHL - particularly in the 1st round - are able to perform as significant contributors in the OHL. Usually. They are not just generic OHL players who are basically interchangeable with players who will never be drafted in terms of their impact. Usually.

Those of us who are worried about the Tinordi pick can freely recognize that there are exceptions, and that Tinordi may turn out to be one, and we recognize that he has lots of time left to develop, and that he hasn't had the exposure to the OHL game that other players (like Doherty) already had prior to their draft. So by and large, we're "relaxed" about it all.

Yet, we *did* have some of the same early experience with Fischer, a player who didn't progress much initially, but we were told to just relax, he'd find his way, defensemen take longer, etc.

Concern is warranted, as is patience and an open mind about the potential for positive future outcome from the pick.

I mean, we see Scott Gomez look mediocre for 25 games with us. Do we say, aww, don't worry, he's played a decade in this league as a 1st/2nd line player and he'll come around. Some of us do. Some of us call for him to be sent to the minors. But hopefully *all* of us are concerned. To whatever extent. You'll get a similar spectrum with Tinordi, but the bottom line is that his current play warrants concern.

Its his first CHL season. Can you all relax.
WJC isnt always a measuring stick as we have seen great players not on the team, and guys on the team who have been busts.

Let him develop. Defencemen always take time to find their game. Give him time before you give him the "Fischer" label.

I don't see why anyone would be upset at people that raise questions in regards to the pick, when you look at how the Habs have struggled with their 1st round picks throughout the modern era and more recently in the Timmins era (though he's done much better outside the 1st round, and with the recent progression of Price at least we have one potential great pick from the 1st for the first time since Koivu in '93, although at 5th overall you better get it right since it was only the 2nd time we have had a top 5 pick since '81)

Doesn't mean he won't pan out, or that people should think he's going to bust. Bringing Fischer's name into doesn't make much sense other then they were American born D prospects picked in the 1st round. It sucks that Tinordi's development appears to be slow going (I haven't been watching any CHL games so I don't have an opinion here) we'll just have to wait and see what the future holds for him. Clearly there's cause for alarm, especially when you look at the problems every single one of Timmins 1st round picks have had to date.

So you're saying we had to give up the 25th pick of last draft and 20-25th of the next for a top 3 player in this draft and potential superstar d-man? Easy for me.

I don't mean to suggest tinordi is a bust or anything. Quite the opposite, i have faith. Just, Fowler will still better(and was drafted way earlier so it's expected). That's all.

Most people don't see Fowler anywhere close to a superstar d-man. His offensive skill in undenyable, but defensively he'll be average maybe slightly better. With Subban already here plus Weber looking close, why trade 2 1sts(maybe more?) for a young offensive d-man. Fowler was definitely a top 5-6 talent but very few teams had him top 3. NYR definitely missed the boat on him, maybe TB also.

For what they were projected, Fowler projects as a Pitkanen and Tinordi as a poor man's Charra.

Most people don't see Fowler anywhere close to a superstar d-man. His offensive skill in undenyable, but defensively he'll be average maybe slightly better. With Subban already here plus Weber looking close, why trade 2 1sts(maybe more?) for a young offensive d-man. Fowler was definitely a top 5-6 talent but very few teams had him top 3. NYR definitely missed the boat on him, maybe TB also.

For what they were projected, Fowler projects as a Pitkanen and Tinordi as a poor man's Charra.

The only difference is that Fowler, if he continues this way, might end up there while the same cannot be said of Tinordi.

Most people don't see Fowler anywhere close to a superstar d-man. His offensive skill in undenyable, but defensively he'll be average maybe slightly better. With Subban already here plus Weber looking close, why trade 2 1sts(maybe more?) for a young offensive d-man. Fowler was definitely a top 5-6 talent but very few teams had him top 3. NYR definitely missed the boat on him, maybe TB also.

For what they were projected, Fowler projects as a Pitkanen and Tinordi as a poor man's Charra.

Yah but no player is offensive+defensive stud unless you're a hall of famer. Guys like green are around average defensively and are still stud d-men. Fowler is on pace to make 40 pts in his rookie year, and he'll improve defensively to above average skills in that category. That combination is far greater than pitkanen. Tinordi won't be a poor man's Chara. I have a hard time believing that Tinordi can match up with chara in ANY category. The only thing similar is that they are physical tall d-men. The similiarities end there. Chara is good offensively, is better defensively, can pass, can shoot, has decent puck control. It's really unfair to Chara to say they even resemble at all. Of course, there are few players in the league who have Chara's skillset, so it's hard for anyone to match up with him. I'd say Fowler is more likely to be a Scott Niedermeyer, but obviously a grade or 2 lower. he won't be some superstar elite and won't be a hall of famer, he'll likely be a top 2 d-man or #1 puck moving d-man.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Em Ancien

The only difference is that Fowler, if he continues this way, might end up there while the same cannot be said of Tinordi.

It will be interesting to see how Fowler turns out. It was interesting the see him drop at the draft. A guy like Tinordi doesn't have his upside but can surely shape himself into a serviceable d-man for us.

How many examples do you need of 18 year olds on Junior National Teams?

Here allow me to give you a clue. Subban at 18 wasn't invited.

It's called under 20 but should really be renamed to the 19-20 Club. Very few players make it at 18. Seguin was sent home last year and he was virtually tied with Hall as a number 1. Leblanc was cut last year. Does that mean we should wet our beds for the next year?

Again, very few 18 year olds are invited and even fewer make it to any national team and the yanks right now are on par with the canucks when it comes to hockey talent.

Quote:

Originally Posted by zzoo

Here are a some examples of Canadian defensemen making the team at 18 years old

That is the list for only Canada, if you look at other countries, and at forwards too, there are plenty of players at 18 years old .... the list goes on and on.

The probability of the players making Canada team and will become a good player in NHL: 50%
The probability of the players NOT making Canada team and will become a good player in NHL: 30%
The probability of the players NOT making USA team and will become a good player in NHL: 20%

It's called under 20 but should really be renamed to the 19-20 Club. Very few players make it at 18. Seguin was sent home last year and he was virtually tied with Hall as a number 1. Leblanc was cut last year. Does that mean we should wet our beds for the next year?

Again, very few 18 year olds are invited and even fewer make it to any national team and the yanks right now are on par with the canucks when it comes to hockey talent.

You are the one who needs to get a clue. Subban was 18 when he first played for Team Canada at the WJHC U20. He turned 19 about five months after the tournament. Last year, he was 20 and he was no longer eligible.

I believe the cutoff date is December 31st. If a player turns 20 after that, he'll be able to play in the tournament as a 20 year old, assuming the tournament isn't over by the time he reaches his 20th birthday. Those players are a minority though.

It's called under 20 but should really be renamed to the 19-20 Club. Very few players make it at 18. Seguin was sent home last year and he was virtually tied with Hall as a number 1. Leblanc was cut last year. Does that mean we should wet our beds for the next year?

Again, very few 18 year olds are invited and even fewer make it to any national team and the yanks right now are on par with the canucks when it comes to hockey talent.

Actually, Subban played for team Canada in 2007-2008, so he did play as an 18 year old. And the tournament is called under-20 because 20 year olds are not eligible to play in that tournament.

So you're saying we had to give up the 25th pick of last draft and 20-25th of the next for a top 3 player in this draft and potential superstar d-man? Easy for me.

Still would have been hard to find a trading partner. Anaheim had Fowler ranked #3 on their board, so I doubt they would have been willing to trade out of #12. To get Fowler, you would have had to trade in front of Anaheim. I'm not sure any of those teams would have been interested in dropping 15+ spots.

The only scenario I could have seen is if you had insisted on St. Louis' first rounder (14th overall) instead of Lars Eller for Halak. And then you could have hypothetically tried to trade up to #10 with the Rangers if you could have convinced them McIlrath would still be there at #14.

I think it's a bit crazy to be talking about trading up for Fowler. I'd say we should have stayed at 27th and got Merrill or Faulk or Petrovic or Marincin and another good prospect at 57th. In fact, I was against this pick from the moment they announced it but that's just me, I'm always against picking defensive-minded (only) players in the first round.

I see Tinordi's ceiling to be a Gill with better skating. So no wonder he's not at the WJC.

It's called under 20 but should really be renamed to the 19-20 Club. Very few players make it at 18. Seguin was sent home last year and he was virtually tied with Hall as a number 1. Leblanc was cut last year. Does that mean we should wet our beds for the next year?

Again, very few 18 year olds are invited and even fewer make it to any national team and the yanks right now are on par with the canucks when it comes to hockey talent.

Dude, you have aosolutely no idea what you are talking about. Subban played at 18. Ryan Ellis at 17. There are many more examples of 18 year olds playing.

I'm NOT saying Tinordi is a bust by any means, just that it isn't a great sign when you aren't invited...

If Tinordi went to the NCAA he would have turned out another fischer. Subban is doing great and has done so because of mental lillingness to improve on his skill set. The guy is a monster. Tinordi needs to practice as much as he can on his hockey game and skills. Speed, Puck Control, wristers, slapshots ect. The guy is 6'6 for crying outloud. All that on ice training for now and you won't need off ice training to much which will tire you out... unless on .... yeh. Wait until you get to the bigs (AHL) and then start training to become a muscular giant. Especially when you don't have the right skills. PRACTICE PRACTICE, I hope he takes the time to practice his individuals skills.

I think it's a bit crazy to be talking about trading up for Fowler. I'd say we should have stayed at 27th and got Merrill or Faulk or Petrovic or Marincin and another good prospect at 57th. In fact, I was against this pick from the moment they announced it but that's just me, I'm always against picking defensive-minded (only) players in the first round.

I see Tinordi's ceiling to be a Gill with better skating. So no wonder he's not at the WJC.

...and a Gill with better skating is what he was billed as. A full career of Gill, of having the biggest man on the ice every night, blocking shots and backing up his teammates sounds good to me.

I think it's a bit crazy to be talking about trading up for Fowler. I'd say we should have stayed at 27th and got Merrill or Faulk or Petrovic or Marincin and another good prospect at 57th. In fact, I was against this pick from the moment they announced it but that's just me, I'm always against picking defensive-minded (only) players in the first round.

I see Tinordi's ceiling to be a Gill with better skating. So no wonder he's not at the WJC.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Brodeur

Still would have been hard to find a trading partner. Anaheim had Fowler ranked #3 on their board, so I doubt they would have been willing to trade out of #12. To get Fowler, you would have had to trade in front of Anaheim. I'm not sure any of those teams would have been interested in dropping 15+ spots.

The only scenario I could have seen is if you had insisted on St. Louis' first rounder (14th overall) instead of Lars Eller for Halak. And then you could have hypothetically tried to trade up to #10 with the Rangers if you could have convinced them McIlrath would still be there at #14.

I understand the obvious doubt, and I agree with both of you. It's not easy, but if possible I would've inquired, maybe they did right? Fowler will be a special player and dropped, so the price of his pick wasn't the same as what he was projected to go(top 5, top 2 at one point). Felt it was worth it.

Something seems sure though and that's what is more problematic to me if we go back to this famous needs vs BPA debate. This clearly seems way more a need than a BPA.....isn't that what you are NOT suppose to base your pick on? Isn't that what cost us Giroux instead of Fischer from Timmins own admission? I guess that if we would have really gone for the BPA, Kuznetsov would have been our pick. Or Merrill. Or Etem. Or others. And was that "need" enough to justify losing a 57th pick for a 113th one?

Again, I'm all for getting bigger. Obviously. But to me and prior to this draft, do people really had that kind of idea that he had that big of a ceiling? It might be hindsight now but if the need was indeed to get bigger, how about satisfying the need with the 2nd rounded with Johns? Beaukeboom? Oh and by the way, he handled himself OK, but people do realize that Tinordi is NOT going to be a fighter in the NHL. This guy could just be what O'Byrne has brought so far as far his pugilistic records. He's big, he can clear the net, but at one point, hearing some people talking you thought Tinordi would annihilate every goon out there.....He's not going to.

And my other problem with the pick is that for a team who has picked more Americans than any other leagues out there, I believe we have a really really average record. We are awaiting the new crop of americans to change that record. Max, Kristo, Bennett, Quailer it could change really fast. But as of now with proven records in the NHL, it's not there. Especially when you start comparing the rest of the league who didn't concentrate on that league like we did and did manage to find some gens along the way.

Yah but no player is offensive+defensive stud unless you're a hall of famer. Guys like green are around average defensively and are still stud d-men. Fowler is on pace to make 40 pts in his rookie year, and he'll improve defensively to above average skills in that category. That combination is far greater than pitkanen. Tinordi won't be a poor man's Chara. I have a hard time believing that Tinordi can match up with chara in ANY category. The only thing similar is that they are physical tall d-men. The similiarities end there. Chara is good offensively, is better defensively, can pass, can shoot, has decent puck control. It's really unfair to Chara to say they even resemble at all. Of course, there are few players in the league who have Chara's skillset, so it's hard for anyone to match up with him. I'd say Fowler is more likely to be a Scott Niedermeyer, but obviously a grade or 2 lower. he won't be some superstar elite and won't be a hall of famer, he'll likely be a top 2 d-man or #1 puck moving d-man.

It will be interesting to see how Fowler turns out. It was interesting the see him drop at the draft. A guy like Tinordi doesn't have his upside but can surely shape himself into a serviceable d-man for us.

Green has been in the NHL 5-6 years and his defense is still below average. Why do you think they left him off Team Canada despite being the top scoring NHL d-man?

Comparing Charra now with Tinordi now is ridiculous, at 18 Charra was more of a project than Tinordi is now, even at 19 he wasn't dminating the WHL.

Still would have been hard to find a trading partner. Anaheim had Fowler ranked #3 on their board, so I doubt they would have been willing to trade out of #12. To get Fowler, you would have had to trade in front of Anaheim. I'm not sure any of those teams would have been interested in dropping 15+ spots.

The only scenario I could have seen is if you had insisted on St. Louis' first rounder (14th overall) instead of Lars Eller for Halak. And then you could have hypothetically tried to trade up to #10 with the Rangers if you could have convinced them McIlrath would still be there at #14.

I was actually surprised to see Fowler go as high as he did in the draft. He was kind of inconsistent in his play last year. That is not to say bad, just very inconsistent

His offense was good with 8 goals and 47 assists. But that left him 7th in the OHL for D men. His defensive play tended to be erratic at times. Not bad. Just not steady. Even some Windsor fans were second guessing him a little bit

What Fowler had coming into the league last year was a big Rep, and he was playing on a strong team

So before anyone starts beating GMs up for not trading up to get him, remember hindsight is 20/20